UKRAINE EMERGENCY TRANSLATION GROUP

Translation is a 5-step process of “straight thinking in the abstract.” The first step is an ontological statement of being beginning with the syllogism: “Truth is that which is so. That which is not truth is not so. Therefore Truth is all there is.” The second step is the sense testimony (what the senses tell us about anything). The third step is the argument between the absolute abstract nature of truth from the first step and the relative specific truth of experience from the second step. The fourth step is filtering out the conclusions you have arrived at in the third step. The fifth step is your overall conclusion.

The Ukraine Emergency Translation Group meets every Friday at 11 a.m. Pacific time via Zoom. We call it the Ukraine Emergency Translation Group but we welcome Translations about anything. Here are sense testimonies (2nd steps) we translated and their corresponding conclusions: (5th steps) this week.

2) People make up their own lives.
5)  Life, existence is Truth expressing everpresent wholeness and completeness. All there is.  All there can be. 

2) I am a slave to my father.
5) Truth is infinite being in the present tense, fatherless, motherless, childless, endless.

All Translators are welcome to join us on Fridays at 11 a.m. Pacific time. The link is: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83608167293?pwd=cFRsckVibXMwTGJ0KzhaV0R2cWJtdz09

For information about Translation or other Prosperos classes go to: https://www.theprosperos.org/teaching

Some comments from group members about this group:

“I like the group interaction and different perspectives. Also, at least for me, it gives me a sense of accountability and keeps the practice fresh in my mind. ” –Sarah Flynn

“This group has freed me up to have more fun with my Translations.”
–Mike Zonta

Becoming “secret agents of the Holy Spirit”

Evan McDermod Jun 13, 2022 The Fifth Dimension Podcast Ep. 204 – James Tunney returns to The Fifth Dimension for a fourth appearance to discuss the automaticity of the new world order and creation of a human automation. James is an author and painter who left a successful career in law to focus on spiritual and artistic development. Purchase James books: https://www.amazon.com/James-Tunney/e… James Tunney website: https://www.jamestunney.com/home Connect with Evan: Substack: https://mcdermod.substack.com/ Audio podcasts: https://www.buzzsprout.com/671482/share

Hawaiian Travel Ad Boasts Sandy White Tourists As Far As The Eye Can See

Yesterday 9:32AM (theonion.com)

HONOLULU—Coaxing viewers to come enjoy all the islands have to offer, a new Hawaii Visitors and Convention Bureau ad boasted Thursday of sandy white tourists as far as the eye could see. “Hawaii is world-renowned for the shimmering, alabaster vacationers lining its popular shorelines,” said a soothing voiceover in the 30-second TV spot, which faded between shots of Caucasian Americans milling about a shopping district in Waikiki, trampling over rare endemic flora at Haleakala National Park, and cannonballing into resort swimming pools while Hawaii residents face water shortages. “Watch the beautiful Pacific waves crash onto the blindingly white visitors from Ohio and Nebraska who drain local resources without a care in the world. Once you say aloha to the hordes of albino tourists stretching for miles along the coast, you’ll find your worries about exploiting these islands and their people melt away.” The commercial concludes with a mention of the islands’ famous sunsets, in which “nature puts on a spectacular show” that features dramatic, dazzling shades of crimson red reflecting off sunburned bodies.

THE FBI’S MAR-A-LAGO SEARCH WAS 2,500 YEARS IN THE MAKING

Democracy Requires Equality Before the Law—And That Includes Ex-Presidents

The FBI’s Mar-a-Lago Search Was 1,500 Years in the Making | Zocalo Public Square • Arizona State University • Smithsonian

Asha Rangappa and Jennifer Mercieca trace the use of the Athenian concept of “isonomia”—equality under the law—and argue that the foundational democratic principle applies even to ex-presidents. Images (Golden Lady JusticeCleisthenes, and search warrant) courtesy of Wikimedia Commons. Illustration by Zócalo.

by ASHA RANGAPPA and JENNIFER MERCIECA

AUGUST 31, 2022 (zocalopublicsquare.org)

https://trinitymedia.ai/player/trinity-player.php?pageURL=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zocalopublicsquare.org%2F2022%2F08%2F31%2Ffbi-search-equality-before-the-law%2Fideas%2Fessay%2F&poweredby=0&voiceId=Joanna&voiceStyle=conversational&ver=6.0&unitId=2900006941&userId=98e63f33-a63d-4d98-bb90-936ce7affd2f&isLegacyBrowser=false&version=20220901_a4222e5b58b7cc5c335027236e02ba35e43a0e08&useCFCDN=0&themeId=140

“All Americans are entitled to the evenhanded application of the law,” Attorney General Merrick Garland assured Americans on August 11, 2022, following the FBI’s execution of a search warrant at the home of former president Donald Trump. But partisan commentary surrounding the Justice Department’s unprecedented step has twisted that very same principle. The refrain of Trump’s supporters—“If they can do this to Trump, they will do it to you!”—sounds a lot like a threat. But it isn’t a threat. In fact, it’s a 2,500-year-old democratic promise.

What does “equality before the law” mean, where does it come from, and why does it matter? The ancient Greek term for Garland’s sentiment is isonomia, a concept which was rooted in democracy itself. Is a former president subject to isonomia? If the rule of law means anything, the answer must be yes. The law must be applied without fear or favor—equally to all—and that includes the former president.

Historians trace the idea of “equality before the law” to the magistrate Cleisthenes, whose democratic reforms to the Athenian constitution in 509 BCE ended tyrannical and aristocratic rule. According to Aristotle, Cleisthenes ushered in what we think of now as the golden age of democracy, which flourished at Athens—despite a few oligarchic interruptions—for nearly 200 years.

While historians associate Cleisthenes with “democracy” (dêmos  = people + kratos = power), he called the government he created isonomia (isos = equal + nomos = law, custom). Isonomia for Cleisthenes seems to mean both the equal right to participate in making the laws and the equal application of the law to every Athenian citizen.

In fact, isonomia occurs in Greek political thought before democracy does—equality before the law is such an essential element of democracy that the political system could not exist without it. Herodotus, in the earliest known use of the word demokratia, invoked isonomia in an imagined debate defending democracy: Equality meant every citizen was eligible for office, all officers were accountable to the people, and all citizens had an equal right of free speech (isēgoría) in the Assembly. These were also the features of Greek democracy, essentially equating the two.

Trump has what we might think of as a “Pigpen” theory of the presidency. If we imagine him as the Peanuts character, Trump believes that a cloud of executive power continues to surround him, even though he left office over 18 months ago.

Political theorists and governments over the past 2,500 years have generally agreed. Cicero, then Livy, then British Whigs like James Harrington and Edward Coke and liberal political theorists like John Locke and David Hume, all invoked isonomia as fundamental to good order, political stability, and liberty. In 1960, the legal theorist and free-market economist Friedrich von Hayek explained how the concept moved from ancient Greece into the English common law tradition as the essential element of libertarianism—and the fundamental grounding of both British and American legal and political theory. In 16th-century England, Justicia—a.k.a. Lady Justice—began appearing with a blindfold, initially as a symbol of the judicial system’s turning a blind eye to those who abused the law, but eventually evolving to symbolize impartiality before the law. And while the United States struggled to perfect racial equality in practice, the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified after the Civil War, enshrined it as a democratic aspiration by guaranteeing, “No State shall…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Law students today still learn the word isonomy, and as Attorney General Garland explained, it’s still the standard to which we hold our laws and our government. But its application to the person occupying the office of the president has, historically, presented some thorny problems. The presidency comes with vast powers, unique privileges, and unofficial immunities. For example, the Constitution entrusts the president to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” making him the top law enforcement official in the country. The most extreme reading of this phrase could suggest (as some argue) that this power allows the president to start and stop investigations at will … including those into himself. (This idea was summed up by President Richard Nixon’s maxim, “When the president does it, it’s not illegal.”) Presidents can also invoke executive privilege, which acts as a constitutional protection against the legislative and judicial branches overreaching into core presidential functions. In theory, executive privilege should ensure the robust and efficient operation of the executive branch—but it can also be used as a shield by presidents inclined toward lawbreaking. Finally, for the last 49 years, the Justice Department has refrained from indicting a sitting president, under the theory that he has so many important duties that it would harm the nation if he had to focus on defending himself at trial.

Whatever temporary get-out-of-jail-free card the presidency might afford, however, disappears as soon as the person is no longer president. The legal perks belong to the office, not the person—and this is the part that seems to be lost on the former president. He repeatedly has claimed executive privilege and the power to declassify documents, and implied that he has immunity from prosecution. Trump has what we might think of as a “Pigpen” theory of the presidency. If we imagine him as the Peanuts character, Trump believes that a cloud of executive power continues to surround him, even though he left office more than 18 months ago. But there is no legal basis for that belief. If Article II power followed ex-presidents around for the rest of their lives, we would effectively have as many “presidents” as we have living former presidents. And in this case, Cleisthenes, who instituted ostracism to expel any citizen who threatened democracy, would likely have any living former president ostracized from the United States in order to maintain equality.

The National Archives made a Cleisthenian legal argument in its May 10, 2022, letter to Trump about the documents at Mar-a-Lago. In rejecting Trump’s claim of a “protective assertion of executive privilege,” the archivist explained that there was no precedent for an assertion of executive privilege by a former president against a sitting one. Trump is just an ordinary guy now, and the law applies to him, just like anyone else.

Equality before the law is an indispensable pillar of a democracy. It is the concept in which liberty is fundamentally grounded and the basis of our legal and political theory. There is no individual who is above the law, not in a government based on the rule of law. The principle of “equality before the law” means precisely that: If the government can search your home for stolen government documents, then it can also search the former president’s home for stolen government documents. That’s isonomia, that’s democracy.

ASHA RANGAPPAis a lawyer, a senior lecturer at Yale’s Jackson Institute for Global Affairs, and a former FBI special agent.

JENNIFER MERCIECAis a historian of American political rhetoric at Texas A&M University and author of Demagogue for President: The Rhetorical Genius of Donald Trump.

The Battle to Protect American Democracy Is the Most Important Battle of Our Lifetimes

democracy

Demonstrators hold a sign at rally with Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) outside the U.S. Capitol to urge the Senate to pass voting rights legislation on Wednesday, January 19, 2022. (Photo: Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

There can be no middle ground in the fight between democracy and authoritarian fascism.

ROBERT REICH September 1, 2022 by robertreich.substack.com

One week after a team of F.B.I. agents descended on his private club and residence in Florida, Trump warned that things could get out of hand if the Justice Department kept the heat on him. “People are so angry at what is taking place,” Trump told Fox News, predicting that if the “temperature” isn’t brought down, “terrible things are going to happen.”

The two threats—one, from an increasingly authoritarian-fascist Republican Party; the second, from ever-larger amounts of corporate and billionaire money in our campaigns and elections—are two sides of the same coin.

But Trump and his allies are doing all they can to increase the temperature. Last Sunday, one of Trump’s closest allies, Senator Lindsey Graham, warned of “riots in the streets” if Trump is prosecuted.

On Tuesday, Trump spent much of the morning reposting messages from known purveyors of the QAnon conspiracy theory and from 4chan, an anonymous message platform where threats of violence often bloom. Some of Trump’s reposts were direct provocations, such as a photograph of President Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and Speaker Nancy Pelosi with their faces obscured by the words, “Your enemy is not in Russia.”

Online threats are escalating against public servants. Bruce E. Reinhart, the federal magistrate judge who approved the warrant to search Mar-a-Lago, has been targeted with messages threatening him and his family.

How to respond to this lawlessness? With bold and unwavering law enforcement.

If Trump has broken the law—by attempting a coup, by instigating an assault on the U.S. Capitol, by making off with troves of top-secret documents—he must be prosecuted, and if found guilty he must be imprisoned.

Yes, such prosecutions might increase tensions and divisions in the short term. They might provoke additional violence.

But a failure to uphold the laws of the United States would be far more damaging in the longer term. It would undermine our system of government and the credibility of that system—more directly and irreparably than Trump has done.

Not holding a former president accountable for gross acts of criminality will invite ever more criminality from future presidents and lawmakers.

It is also important for all those in public life who believe in democracy to call out what the Republican Party is doing and what it has become: not just its embrace of Trump’s Big Lie but its moves toward voter suppression, takeovers of the machinery of elections, ending of reproductive rights, book bans, restrictions on what can be taught in classrooms, racism, and assaults on LGBTQ people.

Last week, Biden condemned “ultra-MAGA Republicans” for a philosophy he described as “semi-fascism.” Today he will deliver a rare prime-time speech outside the old Independence Hall where the Framers of the Constitution met 235 years ago to establish the basic rules of our democratic form of government. The speech is will focus on what the White House describes as the “battle for the soul of the nation”—the fight to protect that democracy.

President Biden’s earlier conciliatory tone and talk of uniting Americans and “healing” the nation from the ravages of Trump has obviously not worked on most of the Republican Party. With the notable and noble exceptions of Liz Cheney and a few other courageous Republicans—most of whom have been or are being purged from the GOP—the Republican Party is rapidly morphing into an anti-democracy movement. With each passing week, it becomes more rabid in its opposition to the rule of law. Republican lawmakers who took an oath of allegiance to the Constitution are repudiating it in word and deed. Republican candidates are lying about the 2020 election and whipping up our fellow countrymen into angry mobs. And as Republican lawmakers and candidates exchange their political integrity for power, Fox News and other rightwing outlets continue to exchange their journalistic integrity for money.

The essential political choice in America, therefore, is no longer Republican or Democrat, right or left, conservative or liberal. It is democracy or authoritarian fascism. There can be no compromise between these two—no halfway point, no “moderate middle,” no “balance.” To come down squarely on the side of democracy is not to be “partisan.” It is to be patriotic.

As Adam Wilkins suggested on this page yesterday, while today’s Republican party does not have its own paramilitary, such as the Nazi’s Brownshirts, the GOP is effectively outsourcing these activities to violent fringe groups such as the “Proud Boys,” “Oathkeepers,” and others who descended on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, and who continue to threaten violence.

Yet Democrats cannot and must not take on this battle alone. They must seek common ground with Independents and whatever reasonable Republicans remain. As Eric T noted on this page, we must continue to appeal to truth, facts, logic, and common sense. We must be unwavering in our commitment to the Constitution and the rule of law. We must be clear and courageous in exposing the authoritarian fascist direction the Republican Party has now chosen, and the dangers this poses to America and the world.

It is also important for Democrats to recognize—and to take bold action against—the threat to democracy posed by big money from large corporations and the super-wealthy: record amounts of campaign funding inundating and distorting our politics, serving the moneyed interests rather than the common good.

Indeed, the two threats—one, from an increasingly authoritarian-fascist Republican Party; the second, from ever-larger amounts of corporate and billionaire money in our campaigns and elections—are two sides of the same coin. Americans who know the system is rigged against them and in favor of the moneyed interests, are more likely to give up on democracy and embrace an authoritarian fascist demagogue who pretends to be on “their side.”

The battle to preserve and protect American democracy is the most important battle of our lifetimes. If we win, there is nothing we cannot achieve. If we lose, there is nothing we can achieve.


© 2021 robertreich.substack.com

Robert Reich

ROBERT REICH

Robert Reich, is the Chancellor’s Professor of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and a senior fellow at the Blum Center for Developing Economies. He served as secretary of labor in the Clinton administration, for which Time magazine named him one of the 10 most effective cabinet secretaries of the twentieth century. His book include:  “Aftershock” (2011), “The Work of Nations” (1992), “Beyond Outrage” (2012) and, “Saving Capitalism” (2016). He is also a founding editor of The American Prospect magazine, former chairman of Common Cause, a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and co-creator of the award-winning documentary, “Inequality For All.” Reich’s newest book is “The Common Good” (2019). He’s co-creator of the Netflix original documentary “Saving Capitalism,” which is streaming now.

Tarot Card for September 2: The Ace of Cups


The Ace of Cups

The Ace of Cups represents the beginning of love, fertility and creativity. It is a card to inspire confidence and happiness. When it turns up a reading of an everyday nature it can indicate the start of a loving relationship (of either the romantic or friendship variety); it can represent the beginning of a project in which a great deal of loving energy is invested (rather like the beginning of angelpaths); or sometimes it can reveal conception – the beginning of a new life.

If you are looking at the Ace of Cups indicating a new relationship, then there will also be people cards up. If it is a romantic relationship, expect to see other good Cups, and perhaps the Lovers. Friendship will be more indicated by Wand type good cards.

The beginning of a project will normally have something like the Star or the Priestess, and Disks around it. These will help you to determine the viability of the project.

Pregnancy will usually come up with other cards which also indicate pregnancy Princess of DisksAce of Wands, and possibly the Empress.

But at a spiritual level the Ace of Cups is even more important. The chalice depicted on most versions of this card is taken to be the Holy Grail, or in pagan terms, the Cauldron of Kerridwyn – source of inspiration and granter of wishes and dreams.

In this interpretation of the card then, we are examining a major spiritual step forward – a period where the deepest and most heartfelt spiritual desires of the querent come to the surface, and may be identified and pursued.

When this card comes up with the HierophantThe Sun, The Moon or sometimes with Death, we must see ourselves as entering into a major transformational period from which we will emerge totally changed by the power of the Universe. During periods such as these we touch the very essence of spiritual power, and hopefully, we succeed in growing toward it, and allowing a little more of its light within us.

The Ace of Cups

(via angelpaths.com and Alan Blackman)

Georgia O’Keeffe on Art, Life, and Setting Priorities

By Maria Popova (themarginalian.org)

In her heyday, Georgia O’Keeffe (November 15, 1887–March 6, 1986) was written about as America’s first great female artist. The great social critic Lewis Mumford once remarked of a painting of hers: “Not only is it a piece of consummate craftsmanship, but it likewise possesses that mysterious force, that hold upon the hidden soul which distinguishes important communications from the casual reports of the eye.” In 1946, O’Keeffe became the first woman honored with a retrospective at the Museum of Modern Art. Exactly thirty years earlier, her career had been catapulted by the lovingly surreptitious support of her best friend, Anita Pollitzer, who had assumed the role of agent-manager and secretly sent some of O’Keeffe’s charcoal drawings to the famous 291 gallery owned by the influential photographer and art-world tastemaker Alfred Stieglitz — the man with whom O’Keeffe would later fall in love. Upon first seeing her work, Stieglitz exclaimed that it was “the purest, finest, sincerest things that have entered 291 in a long time.”

Georgia O’Keeffe by Alfred Stieglitz, 1918

The lifetime of letters between the two women, full of O’Keeffe’s spirited expressiveness and peppered with her delightfully defiant disregard for punctuation, is collected in Lovingly, Georgia: The Complete Correspondence of Georgia O’Keeffe and Anita Pollitzer (public library) — a revealing look at the inner life of one of the past century’s greatest artists, brimming with her unfiltered views on art, work ethic, love, and life.

It is also the record of a remarkable and somewhat tragic friendship, which suffered a profound rift when Pollitzer’s warmhearted and generous biography of O’Keeffe was met with indignant disapproval by the artist. (“You have written your dream picture of me — and that is what it is,” she wrote to her friend in rejecting the biography. “It is a very sentimental way you like to imagine me — and I am not that way at all.”) Even so, for more than thirty years the two women held up mirrors for one another in a most Aristotelian way, using the reflective veneer of their surface differences — Anita with her wholehearted emotionality and faith in the bountifulness of the universe, Georgia with her fierce self-protection and fear of emotional vulnerability, regulated by a formidable work ethic — so that each could reveal her true nature and, in the process, shed light on the other.

Pollitzer’s most vitalizing effect on O’Keeffe was the ability, through the sheer force of her own vibrant aliveness, to pull out of her friend a rejoicing in the full act of living, the kind of “spiritual electricity” essential to great art. O’Keeffe knew and valued this — early on in the friendship, she wrote to Pollitzer: “You are certainly a great little girl — I love the way you just bubble with life — and the enthusiasm of living,” and later, “I haven’t found anyone yet who likes to live like we do.” But she expresses this most exquisitely in a letter from August of 1915. At 27, Georgia — already a formidable presence at that age, typically dressed in tailored suits and immaculate white shirtwaists, with hair pulled back in a disciplined bun — writes to Anita:

Your letters are certainly like drinks of fine cold spring water on a hot day — They have a spark of the kind of fire in them that makes life worthwhile. — That nervous energy that makes people like you and I want to go after everything in the world — bump our heads on all the hard walls and scratch our hands on all the briars — but it makes living great — doesn’t it — I’m glad I want everything in the world — good and bad — bitter and sweet — I want it all and a lot of it too —

Such realness of living was essential for O’Keeffe’s values not only as a person, but also as an artist. Later in the same letter, condemning another artist’s affectation, she writes:

I believe an artist is the last person in the world who can afford to be affected.

Embedded in young O’Keeffe’s worldview was a certain quality of grit, the character trait we now know is the greatest predictor of success. In a letter from September of that year, she makes her determination unequivocal:

I believe in having everything and doing everything you want — if you really want to — and if you can in any possible way… We just want to live dont we.

But O’Keeffe balanced this voracious appetite for freedom and unburdened living with a keen awareness of the practicalities of life and the quintessential tussle of the creative life — the struggle to integrate making art with making a living. She writes to Pollitzer:

You see — I have to make a living

I don’t know that I will ever be able to do it just expressing myself as I want to — so it seems to me that the best course is the one that leaves my mind freest … to work as I please and at the same time makes me some money.

If I went to New York I would be lucky if I could make a living — and doing it would take all my time and energy — there would be nothing left that would be just myself for fun — it would be all myself for money — and I loath — If I can’t work by myself for a year — with no stimulus other than what I can get from books — distant friends and from my own fun in living — I’m not worth much…

But a few days later, O’Keeffe reaches a depth of despondency that testifies to Anaïs Nin’s memorable point about great art being the product of emotional excess. Writing to Anita, she despairs over the psychic drain of apathy:

One can’t work with nothing to express. I never felt such a vacancy in my life — Everything is so mediocre — I don’t dislike it — I don’t like it — It is existing — not living — and absolutely — I just wish some one would take hold of me and shake me out of my wits — I feel that insanity might be a luxury. All the people I’ve meet are all right to exist with — and it is awful when you are in the habit of living.

And yet O’Keeffe’s ambivalence about emotional intensity is clear — without it, she feels vacant; with it, she feels out of control. In a letter from October of 1915, she lovingly but sternly scolds Pollitzer for what she sees as emotional excess:

You mustn’t get so excited… You wear out the most precious things you have by letting your emotions and feelings run riot at such a rate… Dont you think we need to conserve our energies — emotions and feelings for what we are going to make the big things in our lives instead of letting so much run away on the little things everyday

Self-control is a wonderful thing — I think we must even keep ourselves from feeling to much — often — if we are going to keep sane and see with a clear unprejudiced vision —

I do not want to preach to you — I like you like you are — but I would like to think you had a string on yourself and that you were not wearing yourself all out feeling and living now — save a little so you can live always —

Blue and Green Music by Georgia O’Keeffe, 1921

Echoing Sherwood Anderson’s spectacular letter of advice on art and life to his teenage son — “The thing of course, is to make yourself alive. Most people remain all of their lives in a stupor. The point of being an artist is that you may live.” — O’Keeffe adds:

It always seems to me that so few people live — they just seem to exist and I don’t see any reason why we shouldn’t live always — til we die physically — why do it in our teens and twenties…

For her part, Pollitzer echoes Seneca’s memorable wisdom on living wide vs. living long and responds: “I’d lots rather live hard than long.” But for O’Keeffe, the task of living hard is to be attained no matter the circumstances — in a prescient letter from the same month, fourteen years before O’Keeffe would move to the remote Southwest to live a solitary life, she writes:

I believe one can have as many rare experiences at the tail end of the earth as in civilization if one grabs at them — no — it isn’t a case of grabbing — it is — just that they are here — you can’t help getting them.

In many ways, O’Keeffe implicitly offers the art of living as the answer she poses to Pollitzer about the nature of art itself:

What is Art any way?

When I think of how hopelessly unable I am to answer that question I can not help feeling like a farce… Ill lose what little self respect I have — unless I can in some way solve the problem a little — give myself some little answer to it.

A year later, O’Keeffe would revisit the question with a remark that falls between the sincere and the sardonic:

I don’t know what Art is but I know some things it isn’t when I see them.

Georgia O’Keeffe by Alfred Stieglitz, 1918

And yet O’Keeffe learns the invaluable art of embracing the unknown and writes to Pollitzer a few days later:

This feeling of not knowing anything and being pretty sure that you never will is — well — I might say awful — if it wasn’t for a part of my make up that is always very much amused at what out to be my greatest calamities — that part of me sits in the grand stand and laughs and claps and screams — in derision and amusement and drives the rest of me on in my blundering floundering game — Oh — it’s a great sport

A month later, O’Keeffe revisits the notion of wholehearted living and touches on the presently trendy concept of “work-life balance” — a rather toxic divide, I believe — writing to Pollitzer:

Haven’t worked either since Monday and here it is Saturday afternoon — Ive just been living. It seems rediculous that any one should get as much fun out of just living — as I — poor fool — do — … Next week Im going to work like a tiger.

[…]

I wonder if I am a lunatic… Imagination certainly is an entertaining thing to have — and it is great to be a fool.

Though O’Keeffe was known for her unflinching work ethic — an artist who, dissatisfied with the quality of commercially available canvases, began stretching her own — she never abandoned this exuberant joy in the art of living. A few days later, in November of 1915, she writes:

I just cant imagine anyone being any more pleased and still being able to live.

But O’Keeffe’s greatest feat was in bridging her discipline with her dedication to wholehearted living. In December of 1915, a period when she was particularly short on money, she writes to Pollitzer:

Anyone with any degree of mental toughness ought to be able to exist without the things they like most for a few months at least.

Still … I sometimes think its almost a sin to refuse to satisfy yourself.

Even so, O’Keeffe isn’t free from the self-conscious guilt we tend to experience when we feel unproductive. A few weeks later, still unhappily stationed at her teaching position in South Carolina, she captures this moral struggle in rather strong language:

Its disgusting to be feeling so fine — so much like reaching to all creation — and to be sitting around spending so much time on nothing —

I am disgusted with myself —

I was made to work hard — and Im not working half hard enough — Nobody else here has energy like I have — no one else can keep up

I hate it

When able to bridge her love of life and her love of work, however, O’Keeffe captures the exultant joy of creative flow and self-expression beautifully:

Ive been working like mad all day … it seems I never had such a good time — I was just trying to say what I wanted to say — and it is so much fun to say what you want to — I worked till my head all felt light in the top — then stopped and looked… — I really doubt the soundness of the mentality of a person who can work so hard.

Red Hill and White Shell by Georgia O’Keeffe, 1938

O’Keeffe would go on to create for herself the kind of life and environment best suited for such delirious and dogged application of her talent and work ethic. Like another great artist, Agnes Martin, who memorably asserted that “the best things in life happen to you when you’re alone,” O’Keeffe mastered the art of solitude by deliberately avoiding social distractions to make art always her priority. In a Saturday Review profile piece Pollitzer wrote of her friend in 1950, she quoted O’Keeffe as saying:

I know I am unreasonable about people but there are so many wonderful people whom I can’t take the time to know.

In a 1958 letter to Pollitzer, O’Keeffe, by that point in her early seventies, speaks to her priorities directly:

Most of the time I am alone with my dog and think it is fine to be alone — I have been working and rather like my doings — I really work like a day laborer — have been preparing canvas and it is really hard work but Im determined to prepare enough to last four or five years so there will always be lots of empty ones around. Im even going to frame them and back them so there will be nothing left to do but the paintings… My life is good — and I like it. The dog and I have a walk almost every early morning and again at sunset — He just now banged on the door to tell me he was ready to come in and go to bed.

But perhaps the single most piercing sentiment, the one most vividly expressive of O’Keeffe’s lifelong priorities, comes from her notes on the very artifact that caused the demise of her friendship with Pollitzer — the biography O’Keeffe deemed wholly unrepresentative of her spirit. One of her many corrections on the manuscript reads:

I do not like the idea of happyness — it is too momentary — I would say that I was always busy and interested in something — interest has more meaning to me than the idea of happyness.

What an exquisite way to capture the idea that happiness is found in being intensely present with one’s experience.

Empathic friends can provide the right kind of peer pressure

Empathic friends can provide the right kind of peer pressure | Psyche

Teenagers hired by the municipality handing out coronavirus information flyers in different languages in Jakobsberg, Sweden on 9 April 2020. Photo by Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP/Getty

Marta Miklikowskais an associate professor of psychology at Umeå University in Sweden and a researcher affiliated with the Institute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education. She does research on intergroup relations, anti-immigrant attitudes, diversity, empathy, activism, and adolescent development.

Lauree Tilton-Weaveris professor of psychology at Örebro University in Sweden. She is a lifespan developmental psychologist focused on the psychological, emotional and social development of adolescents within the contexts of family and friends.

Edited by Matt Huston

31 August 2022 (psyche.co)

Peer influence in adolescence tends to get a bad rap. We hear plenty about young people bullying each other and friends getting high together or wasting time on social media. Parents are advised to be mindful about peers pressuring their children into risky situations or encouraging deviant attitudes. Adolescents are warned about getting into the wrong crowd. Countless films and novels have highlighted harmful peer dynamics, and scientific papers have been written about how peers facilitate antisocial behaviours and substance use.

This focus on negative peer influence during adolescence is understandable: it is a time when many are especially vulnerable to peer pressure, in part because peers are a more important reference group at this life stage than at others. Adolescents turn increasingly toward their peers; the relations they have with parents can become strained as they seek ways to become more independent. Youth are also still developing cognitive control over their behaviour and emotions, which means that a problematic peer context can be risky and difficult to navigate.

Yet an overly negative view of adolescent peer influence can be misleading – and might cause parents and educators to overlook its potential for promoting healthy development. Adolescents can, for instance, be swayed by their peers to engage in prosocial behaviours, including volunteering. Perhaps you can recall your own examples of certain teen friends encouraging you to help others, whether it was assisting another student with their homework or volunteering together in a soup kitchen. In the past two decades, scientists who study peer influence have taken a more hopeful view of peer relationships as essential for positive development. We now have evidence that friends can also lower the risk of mental health problems and strengthen a sense of identity in youth. The impact of friends can accumulate over time to help build the foundations for wellbeing and relationships in adulthood. Positive peer relations in adolescence are associated with more satisfying romantic relationships and greater effectiveness at work later in life.

The positive impact of many adolescent friendships can be explained in part by how they help young people to develop their interpersonal capacities. Key among these is empathy – the ability to understand another’s mental states, share another’s emotions, and feel concern about others’ welfare. Empathy is a ‘social glue’ that facilitates lasting relationships, good relational communication, and successful conflict management. No wonder research shows empathic individuals are more helpful, kind and cooperative, and less likely to harass others.

For optimal empathy development, it’s not enough to simply have any friends … What seems to matter is having empathic friends

How do friendships facilitate the development of empathy? According to social learning theory, empathic friends serve as role models for adolescents. Repeated interactions with empathic friends provide opportunities for the modelling and observation of empathic concern, turn-taking, and taking others’ perspectives. When one friend responds empathically to another (eg, after the other discloses some worries), that response is felt as supportive, which can strengthen the friendship bond and increase the likelihood of future empathic responding among the friends. In addition, mutual disclosure among friends provides them with the opportunity to learn about others’ thoughts, intentions and emotions, and maintaining friendships over time requires learning to negotiate the needs of all parties.

We recently conducted research that helps to further illuminate how friendship might affect empathy development during adolescence. We analysed questionnaire data from 318 adolescents in Sweden, collected by the researcher Erik Amnå and his team on two occasions, one year apart. Each adolescent reported the names of up to eight friends at school, and if a peer confirmed the friendship, we treated these students as friendship pairs. Members of the friendship pairs also each rated how well certain empathy-related statements described them personally. These prompts covered two forms of empathy: perspective-taking, the ability to adopt the viewpoints of other people (eg, ‘Sometimes I try to understand my friends better by imagining how things would look from their perspective’); and empathic concern (eg, ‘When I see someone being taken advantage of, it feels like I want to protect that person’).

Our results indicate that, for optimal empathy development, it’s not enough to simply have any friends. We found that adolescents who had a lot of friends weren’t necessarily more empathic – that is, they were not more inclined to try to see other people’s points of view, and weren’t more concerned about others than were adolescents with fewer friends. What seems to matter is having empathic friends. Adolescents whose friends rated relatively highly on measures of perspective-taking and empathic concern tended to increase more in their own self-rated empathy over the course of a year, compared with those who had less empathic friends.

Other research that we have conducted shows a similar pattern: having one friend with an immigrant background was associated with increases in adolescents’ empathy and positive attitudes towards immigrants over time. Having a greater number of immigrant friends, however, did not seem to play a role. So, it may be the quality rather than the quantity of friendships that matters most to adolescent empathy development.

Schools could seek to promote positive peer relations and to mitigate the marginalisation of youth with social difficulties

The potential for positive peer influence suggested by these studies could be harnessed by school and community leaders who want to facilitate empathy development. Public campaigns such as Students Against Depression in the UK and Vi gillar olika (‘We like different’) in Sweden have already recognised the power of peer modelling to steer adolescents towards prosocial behaviours. While social and emotional learning (SEL) programmes in many schools teach youth to put themselves in others’ shoes and to feel concern about others, schools can still maximise the effectiveness of teaching by using peer influence. This influence could potentially be tapped, for example, by asking class leaders to check with their classmates in order to identify students who should be recognised for their empathic efforts. Involving adolescents who are viewed as leaders or having high status is important, because their influence over peers is likely to be especially strong.

Despite the apparent power that peers have to encourage empathy development, there are processes that might get in the way of such positive effects. We know that adolescents tend to select friends who are similar to them. That means that empathic youth are likely to select relatively empathic friends, while less empathic youth might select friends who are similarly lower in empathy. By befriending low-empathy peers, adolescents who are low in empathy themselves could miss out on the lessons that friendships with empathic peers offer. This may exacerbate the social difficulties of these youth.

What could be done to counteract peer effects that limit empathy development? One idea is that parents, schools and community organisations could pay more attention to peer-group dynamics. For example, schools could seek to promote positive peer relations and to mitigate the marginalisation of youth with social difficulties during SEL classes. They could also avoid grouping together low-empathy or aggressive adolescents, and instead create opportunities for contact and friendships between lower- and higher-empathy youth. Once formed, such friendships might help to increase the empathy of less empathic adolescents. It is unfortunate that SEL classes typically end before students enter high schools; our work on youths’ developing empathy suggests that those in high school could still benefit from them.

Youth today have more opportunity for contact with friends than ever before due to longer schooling and social media. These recent trends have likely made peer relations even more important than they were in the past. Our research shows that this is not strictly a cause for worry: the right peers, it seems, can help young people to focus more on others’ mental states and learn to attend to others’ emotional needs. These kinds of peer processes deserve as much attention as the more concerning ones.

Tarot Card for September 1: The Lovers

The Lovers

The Lovers is numbered six and is a card of innocence, trust, exhileration and joy. The couple (often seen intertwined or standing side by side) are soulmates, each being one half of a perfect union. The figure flying above them is Cupid, blessing them with the might of Universal Love.

The Lovers are the embodiment of the harmony of opposites. This is how we are before the fear and prejudices of life intervene. We give our love freely to others and we need no other to make us whole.

Love is much misunderstood. It is subjective and the word ‘love’ is so overused that it has almost lost its original meaning. We are all capable of the immense power of deep feelings. Love happens when we step out of the darkness of fear, pain and doubt into the light. Love can move mountains. Love breeds love – a happy smile breaking through another’s melancholy proves this.

Loving ourselves is the first step to touching the mighty power of Universal Love. We must live each moment as though it were the only one – rejoicing and celebrating, loving the soul within us rather than fighting with the reflection the rest of the world sees.

The Lovers

(via angelpaths.com and Alan Blackman)